Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-03-22 Minutes272-2 0 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT The Board of Adjustment met at 4:00 P.M., Wednesday, March 22, 1967, in the Directors Room in the City Administration Building. Members Present: J.F. Robinson, J.F. Palmer, Carl Yates Ed Clements, Wade Fincher. Members Absent: None Others Present: Walter Niblock, James A. Pennington, Dawn Alexander, Bass Trumbo, Lewis Jones The meeting was called to order by Chairman, J.F. Robinson. The first application given consideration was that of Walter R. Walter R. Niblock Niblock, Mr. Niblock explained to the Board that he would like to remodel the existing garage and shed, and to build an addition onto the existing structure, Mr. Niblock pointed out the addition will be closer to the west, side property line than permitted by the zoning ordinance. No one appeared.at the hearing to object to the applicant's proposal, the applicant was dismissed. The next application considered by the Board was that of Mr. James JAMES „A. A. Pennington for the use of property located in the eleven hundred PENNINGTON . block of South Washington. Mr. Pennington had requested permission to build a duplex upon the lot with 58 feet street frontage; whereas the zoning ordinance requires 60 feet of street frontage do the R-2 zone. Mr. Pennington pointed out the street frontage was the only violation of the zoning ordinance. The Board members felt the request of the applicant had been clearly explained. There being no further discussion, the applicant was dismissed. The third and last application was that of Mrs, Dawn Alexander. MRS. D. ALEXANDER Mrs Alexander has made application to the Board of AjiustmentOfor Dawn's flowers) an interpretation of the requirements of the city zoning ordinance No. 1239. The interpretation requested is for the use of the property located at 409 East Lafayette. This property is in a R-2, Two Family Residential Zone. Mrs. Alexander was present to explain her application to the Board of Adjustment, Mr. Bass Trumbo was also present to represent Mrs. Alexander. Mr. Trumbo said he thought there was some misunderstanding as to why this meeting was called. In his interpretation of the Zon- ing Ordinance, Section 3, 1-c under uses permitted, the office or studio of a person of a recognized profession would be allowed. Mr. Trumbo then asked Mrs Alexander if she was a professional designer? Mrs Alexander replied she was listed as a floral designer and would like to read the definition of one to the Board members. "A Floral Designer, designs and fashions floral pieces and decorations; selects natural and artificial flowers and foliage. Wires, pins, and wraps st s with floral to e, to form bouquets and corsages, sprays, wreaths, centerpieces, and other designs. Plans floral settings for events, �.I Lam', 273-2 such as weddings and balls, and decorated buildings, such as churches, homes, and dancehalls." Mr. Trumbo said the petition stated that they wanted to be allowed to continue with the operation of Mrs. Alexander's floral design service located in her residence. Mr. Trumbo said the petitioner believes her business qualifies as a home occupation which is permissible in an R-2, Two Family Residential District. Mr. Trumbo stated that if a variance is needed to continue with this service then that is what they want but he does not feel this is so. Mrs Alexander was asked to explain when she statted this business and to explain in detail the things she did. Mrs Alexander showed the Board members pictures of her work area and outside the home. She said her shop was unique in the way that she filled the gap that a retail florists does not. She uses two rooms at the back of the house for her work. Mrs. Alexander stated that her sales take place mostly over the phone such as for country clubs, sororities and fraternities, and that there was not an opportunity for over the counter sales. She uses a station wagon for her deliveries and bills people monthly and recieves payment through the mail also. Mrs. Alexander said she could not relocated because of several reasons, Mrs. Alexander said this was not a 9 to 5 business and that she works at different times, also she has 4 children at home and a family to take care of. She said profit wise it would not be logical to move to a new location. The Chairman then asked the opponents to be heard. Mr. Lewis Jones represented the opponents. Mr. Jones said he would like to submit two petitions to the Board of Adjustment, and that these petitions were signed by Mrs. Alexanders neighbors and residents in the surrounding area. Mr. Jones said the people who signed these petitions object to this commercial activityrin the neighborhood, he said there is trafficc:in and out to pick up services at this residence also deliveries are made to and from 409 E. Lafayette. Mr. Jones said in -reading the definiiion'of a home occupation that there shall be no stock or in trade on commodity for sale upon the premises, and in Mrs. Alexander's business there has been fresh cut flowers sold to people who come by especially for this service. Board member, Carl Yates arrived at the meeting. Mr. Van Howell said she lived next door to Mrs Alexander and feels 'her property has gone down in value because of this business being conducted next door to her, also people park in her driveway to go over to Dawn's Flower Shop. She said this especially is annoying when she tries to get out the driveway with her own car and has to go next door to ask someone to move their car. Mike Barkley said he was a member of the Student Senate and had prepared a statement foom the Student Senate in behalf of Mrs. Alexander. Mr. Barkley said he had lived in Fayetteville for 5 years and that Mrs. Alexander has been a big help to the many functions of the University. To him it seems the neighbors would be stretching the point as far as a car being parked in their driveway. He said the students are financially 274-2 unable to go to the larger retail fbrists and Mrs. Alexander is understanding of this. • Ray Coultrip (449 E. Lafayette) said he was only interested in the traffic situation especially for out of town people. Lelan Bryon (425 E. Lafayette) said he lived the second door to the east of Mrs. Alexander and that he had nothing but high esteem for Mrs. Alexander and her family but as a property owner he is deeply concerned with what goes -:on in the area and this is the first time to his know- ledge that a commercial business has been established on Lafayette Street. Mr. Bryan said he would regret very much for the area to become commercial in any way. The Chairman asked Mrs. Alexander if he were to come to her shop could he buy fresh cut flowers? Mrs Alexander said no she could not sell them like that because she was not equipped to wrap them or to make change. Mr. Shelby Kinard said he lived next door to Mrs. Alexander and would like to see her continue with the operation for money purposes, and that it would not be economical for her to rent a place for this business. Bass Trumbo said he would like to point out that there is a traffic problem on Lafayette in general and there might be a little additional traffic due to Mrs. Alexander but not enough to justify the complaints • about it. The family has 4 cars owned by them. The Board members felt the applicant had presented the facts of this case; therefore the applicant was dismissed. On the application of Mr. Walter R. Niblock for a variance from zoning ordinance No. 1239 for the use of property at 327 East Maple Street, J.F. Palmer moved that the Board of Adjustment waive the side yard setback requirements of Zoning Ordinance No. 1239 as requested. The. motion was seconded by Wade Fincher and passed unanimously. In regard to the request of Mr. James A. Pennington, Ed Clement moved that the Boarduof Adjustment waive the requirements of Ordinance No. 1239 and that Mr. Pennington be permitted to build a duplex upon a lot with 58 feet of street frontage. The motion was seconded by J.F. Palmer and' passed unanimously. In regard to the application of Mrs. Dawn Alexander on motion by Ed Clement, seconded by J.F. Palmer the Board unanimously voted to deny the request of Mrs. Alexander to continue with the operation of her artistic floral design service located in her residence. This motion was made with a time element to be set by the City Building Inspector as to how long Mrs. Alexander has to move this business from the home. • It was the Boards opinion this was not a home occupation type use, and felt it would be changing the character of the neighborhood to allow it to continue. 275-2 The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted • Secretary Date: Approved by the Board of Adjustment • r 1 U